\ APHC010413882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADES AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^ PRESENT the honourable SRI JUSTICE TARLADA WRIT PETITION NO: OF RAJASEKHAR RAO^ Between: Bholem Gopalam, S/o. Bangari Aged Village Anakapalli District. 72 years, Cultivation R/o. Makavarapale ...PetitionejL AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Guntur District 2. The District Collector, Anakapalli District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Narsipatnam, Ankapalli District, 4. The Thasildar, Makavarapalem Mandal Anakapalli District -Respondents Petition under Article 226'of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, pleased to issue a Writ Order of direction Writ of Mandamus declaring the pending the Application of the the High Court may be perticularly, one in the nature of action of the respondent no 4 in keeping petitioner for Mutation of the revenue records situated at Makavarapalem Village and Mandal, Anakapalli District, Andhra Pradesh despite the petitioner had pard requ,s,te fee on Dated 06/03/2025 more than 30 days is contraryrto the. over survey no 91-1 of extent 0.21 ^ Sec 5 (1) provision of ANDHRA PRADESH RIGHTS IN LAND AND PATTADAR PASS BOOKS ACT, 1971 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Articles 14,19,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No 4 to dispose the Application Dated 06/03/2025. lA NO: 1 OF 2n7R Petition under Section tsfcPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No 4 to dispose 06/03/2025 and pass order or orders i disposal of the writ petition,'^— Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P NANILU NAIDU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: of the F-line Application Dated in accordance with law, pending I .V 4 APHC010413882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21539/2025 Between: I.BHOLEM GOPALAM, S/O BANGARl AGED 72 YEARS, CULTIVATION R/0 MAKAVARAPALE VILLAGE ANAKAPALLl DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLl DISTRICT. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM, ANKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4.THE THASILDAR, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLl DISTRICT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, A.P. VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ Order of direction particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no 4 in keeping pending the Application of the petitioner for Mutation of the revenue records over survey no 91-1 of extent 0.21 cents situated at Makavarapalem Village and Mandal, Anakapalli District, Andhra Pradesh despite the petitioner had paid requisite fee on Dated 06/03/2025more than 30 days is contrary to the Sec 5 (1) provision of ANDHRA PRADESH RIGHTS IN LAND AND PATTADAR PASS BOOKS ACT, 1971 is illegal , arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Article 14,19,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No 4 to dispose the Application Dated 06/03/2025 and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 praying that in the Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondent No 4 to dispose of the F-line Application Dated 06/03/2025 and pass order or 2 orders in accordance with law, pending disposal of the writ petition may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P NANILU NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE % 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.21539 of 2025 ORDER:- Pithily this writ petition is filed on the grounds that application dated 06.03.2025 was made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the application, as such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. The Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh^ held as follows: 2. “...Dispose of the representation mantra is increasingly permeating the judicial process in the High Courts and the Such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do not service to the cause of justice. The litigant is back again before the Court, as this case shows, having incurred attendant costs and suffered delays of the legal This would have been obviated by calling for a Tribunals. process, counter in the first instance, thereby resulting in finality to the dispute... This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a Court to authorities, before directing "consideration" of a claim or representation should examine whether the claim or representation is with reference to a "live" issue or whether it is with reference to a "dead" or "stale" issue, stale" issue or dispute, the Court/tribunat should put an end to the matter and should not direct 3. If it is with reference to a "dead" or (2019) 15 see 613 4 consideration or reconsideration. If the Court to tribunal deciding to direct "consideration" without itself examining the merits, it should make it clear that such consideration will be without prejudice to any contention relating to limitation or delay and laches. Even if the court does not expressly say so, that would be the legal position and effect." 4. Disposal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders directing consideration of representation though result in quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but such orders do more disservice than service to the cause of justice. 5. However, the respondents are directed that the petitioner's application dated 06.03.2025 be considered by examining thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. Sd/- M RAMESH BA^U DEPUTY TER //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. r 2. The District Collector, Anakapalli District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Narsipatnam, Ankapalli Distript^ 4. The Thasildar, Makavarapalem Mandal, Anakapalli District 5. One CC to Sri P Nanilu Naidu Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]. 7. Two CD Copies TF •> • ^ ■ 'm h. n.- ; •j 1*' . . ^ > HIGH COURT DATED:14/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 21539 OF 2025 SEP MB K DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS